Jennings v Rice [2003] 1 P&CR 8

Facts

  • Mr. Jennings, a gardener, provided Mrs. Rice, an elderly widow, with gardening, household maintenance, and personal care over several decades.
  • Mrs. Rice repeatedly assured Mr. Jennings that he would receive her house and estate upon her death.
  • Relying on these assurances, Mr. Jennings continued his services without formal payment, believing he would inherit the property.
  • On Mrs. Rice's death, her will did not leave her house or estate to Mr. Jennings.
  • Mr. Jennings brought a proprietary estoppel claim to enforce the assurances.
  • The trial court awarded Mr. Jennings a lump sum of £200,000, less than the full value of the estate.
  • Mr. Jennings appealed, claiming entitlement to the entire estate.

Issues

  1. Whether Mr. Jennings had established the elements of proprietary estoppel: assurance, reliance, and detriment.
  2. If proprietary estoppel was established, the extent of the remedy to which Mr. Jennings was entitled.
  3. Whether the awarded remedy should match the full value of the assurance or be limited to a proportionate response to the detriment suffered.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal upheld the trial court's decision awarding Mr. Jennings £200,000.
  • The Court emphasized the principle that remedies for proprietary estoppel must be proportionate to the claimant's reliance and detriment, not automatically the value of the promised property.
  • The remedy was determined based on the extent of Mr. Jennings’ reliance, the detriment suffered, and considerations of fairness.
  • The expectation of inheriting the entire estate was found to be disproportionate relative to the services and detriment provided.

Legal Principles

  • Proprietary estoppel requires three elements: assurance, reliance, and detriment.
  • The court has discretion to grant relief that is proportionate to the detriment suffered rather than rigidly enforce the original assurance.
  • The proportionate remedy principle requires courts to balance the claimant's expectation with the detriment, ensuring remedies are neither excessively generous nor inadequate.
  • Remedies may range from monetary awards to grants of property interests, depending on the circumstances.

Conclusion

Jennings v Rice established that remedies in proprietary estoppel claims should be fair and proportionate to the detriment and expectation, granting courts flexibility to tailor relief to the facts rather than automatically awarding the full value of any assurance.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal